My Website Challenge

[High Fidelity]

Thanks, Py! I'll check it out!

No worries, brother.

Let me know what you think.

 

[JustMeSee]

It depends on what you define as a computer, and not just a calculator.

AV, if there are legitimate creation science websites (i.e. fact based), you are free to find them. Rather than demand other people to jump to your command, use your electronic computer to open your computer programmed browser and search the science given internet.

It is pretty clear that nine pages into this no one knows of this elusive creationist based science website.

 

[AV1611VET]

AV, if there are legitimate creation science websites (i.e. fact based),

There aren't any, in my opinion.

Creation science is a contradiction in terms.

 

[JustMeSee]

There aren't any, in my opinion.

Creation science is a contradiction in terms.

But creationists have been and are scientists. While the terms may seem to be an oxymoron, there is something more going on.

 

[AV1611VET]

But creationists have been and are scientists. While the terms may seem to be an oxymoron, there is something more going on.

That's not what this thread is about.

I'm trying to give those who say ICR, DI, and AiG are less-than-honorable sites the chance to tell me what site they would accept as a legitimate one.

If they can't, then they should be settling for second-best; don't you think?

 

[PsychoSarah]

That is a dangerous thing to say, because always you can find a crank somewhere to support whatever contention you want supported - even one with PhD after his name. The fact that 99.99% of his colleagues think he is nuts is neither here nor there, so far as the true believers in whatever barmy notion it is they want supported are concerned.

If they are absolutely nuts, then obviously they aren't a reliable source. I said I would look like it, and see if it checks out, if it is written by some nut with a PhD or is really old obviously it won't check out.

 

[TLK Valentine]

There aren't any, in my opinion.

Creation science is a contradiction in terms.

So this entire "challenge" was a snipe hunt from the start.

 

[TLK Valentine]

That's not what this thread is about.

I'm trying to give those who say ICR, DI, and AiG are less-than-honorable sites the chance to tell me what site they would accept as a legitimate one.

If they can't, then they should be settling for second-best; don't you think?

Are you suggesting that if there are no honest creationists, we should listen to the liars?

 

[TLK Valentine]

What you can recommend is a website that gives us a win-win situation.

And if you don't have one, then employ your great scientific methodist analytic research data-hunting fact-finding deduction logic skills and find me one.

So you want me to do your work for you to provide a "win-win" situation... for you.

I told you that creationists were lazy, but this is beyond the pale even for you guys.

 

[Seipai]

That's not what this thread is about.

I'm trying to give those who say ICR, DI, and AiG are less-than-honorable sites the chance to tell me what site they would accept as a legitimate one.

If they can't, then they should be settling for second-best; don't you think?

How about a site that deals with real science instead:

TalkOrigins Archive: Exploring the Creation/Evolution Controversy

You can find almost any question that creationists ask answered honestly there.

Getting to the truth regardless of who's feelings are hurt should be the ultimate goal.

 

[TLK Valentine]

How about a site that deals with real science instead:

TalkOrigins Archive: Exploring the Creation/Evolution Controversy

You can find almost any question that creationists ask answered honestly there.

Getting to the truth regardless of who's feelings are hurt should be the ultimate goal.

Quite true -- so let's find out if creationists are interested in getting to the truth.

 

[Sayre]

So... when it comes to this EU whackjob theory... given we can't find any EU websites offering legitimate science, are we forced into a corner to accept second best? I don't think so!

Legitimate science or go away.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Oh, then, by all means -- correct me.

If it wasn't Isaac Newton, then who was it?

I'll wait for an answer -- and if it's more than two words long, I'll assume you're Gish galloping; like my buddy here is doing.

Is there anyone besides me who:

• Finds it humorous -- and very revealing -- that AV spends his time "waiting for an answer" coming up with excuses to reject said answer, and
• Finds it ironic -- and also revealing -- that his excuse would be a dishonest creationist tactic named after a famously dishonest creationist?

 

[TLK Valentine]

About CiS | Christians in Science

A very good resource. They hold bi-weekly or bi-monthly meetings just down the road from me and I've been meaning to attend some.

Thanks, Py! I'll check it out!

As will I -- it certainly merits some scrutiny.

 

[Hammster]

ADMIN HAT ON



Closed at OP request.


ADMIN HAT OFF